Across the UK and throughout Europe large amounts of land are being managed with the intention of benefitting wildlife, particularly pollinating insects and farmland birds, numbers of which have been seen to drop over the past thirty years.

Under the new European Common Agricultural Policy, some such management techniques may become compulsory ‘greening measures,’ completion of which will be essential to qualify for full support funding. In response to calls for greening, intended to make huge support payments more acceptable to the European public, farming groups have requested that ‘greening measures’ be presented as a menu of options, from which farmers can select environmental stewardship measures.

However, recent research has revealed that a voluntary approach to conservation measures, as is currently in place across most of Europe, is only proving partially effective. In spite of the widespread adoption of environmental Stewardship schemes, which have been taken up in an attempt to boost falling biodiversity and, in the UK, avoid compulsory regulation, studies have yet to record measureable benefits from such schemes.

In July, the first scientific study to report national benefits from such schemes concluded that, although under certain circumstances ES measures could effectively support wildlife, for the most part, the schemes are inherently flawed in their delivery.   

image expired

Across the EU populations of some farmland birds have been in freefall. While some species are benefitting from the shift in agricultural practices thought to be at least partially responsible for the overall decline, including tree sparrows, wood pigeons, goldfinches and jackdaws, many species have shown serious declines. Numbers of grey partridges, turtle doves, starlings and yellow wagtails fell by 50, 74, 51 and 55 per cent respectively in the 35 years to 2010, according to the British Trust for Ornithology.

Studies of the 19 species of farmland bird have revealed that ‘generalists,’ which can survive in a wider range of conditions, are faring well, whereas ‘specialists’, species which are reliant on arable in-field habitats are suffering. Overall, the last European Bird Census Council report revealed that populations of farmland birds declined by 45 per cent between 1980 and 2009.

Environmental Stewardship aims to reverse trends

In the UK, environmental Stewardship schemes are delivered in two tiers; Entry Level and Higher Level Stewardship. A Natural England spokesperson said HLS options in particular can provide support for farmland birds and that the organisation is “constantly looking to refine and develop the schemes and the way they are delivered, based on the most up to date evidence, to ensure they deliver the most for natural environment.”

These schemes aim to deliver benefits in three areas identified as being essential to wild birds:

· Nesting habitat: This varies between species, but needs to be safe and secure and may be in the middle of a field, field margins, in hedges or trees.

· Summer food: A regular supply of insects and other invertebrates are critical food sources for developing chicks and adults throughout the summer.

· Winter food: Many farmland birds rely on seeds and so an abundant source of seed food is needed throughout the winter months.

In England, Environmental Stewardship was introduced in 2005 to address the shortcomings of previous schemes and tackle falling biodiversity. However, researchers who published a study on Responses of birds to agri-environment management in the Journal of Applied Ecology this July noted, “As for schemes in other countries, assessments to date have revealed little evidence for national-scale biodiversity benefits [from ES measures].”

Ecologists reveal current measures are too patchy to prove effective

The researchers assessed the efficacy of ES in driving changes in national farmland bird populations between 2002 and 2010. Although the group said it had found “little evidence for biodiversity benefits” from ES projects, they did admit “We found strong evidence for positive effects of management that provides winter food resources… on population growth rates across multiple [grain-eating] species.” These management measures included provision of overwinter stubble and wild bird seed crops. Measures aimed to provide breeding season benefits were found to yield mixed results.

The researchers working on the July report suggested that some negative trends they identified may illustrate that certain management decisions had led to “unforeseen predation or competition effects,” whereby a small area of suitable provisioning with no similar patches nearby led birds to compete over the scarce feed and attracted predators to the locality.

Nevertheless, they said their study demonstrated that such management has a significant effect when carried out correctly, as when food is provided winter-round or when enough different sources are available. They concluded, “A combination of low uptake of key in-field options that provide winter seed and a failure to cover the late-winter period effectively explains the lack of national population responses. Such issues need to be addressed before schemes like Environmental Stewardship will achieve their goals.”

Since the introduction of voluntary measures, industry-led voluntary campaigns have worked to improve uptake of agri-environment measures. The research conducted for the Journal of Applied Ecology concluded that uptake of the schemes had not been widespread enough, meaning “Despite the positive effects, national declines in the species concerned continue, as most effects found were insufficient to turn population declines into increases.”

The researchers stated that, in addition to the currently inadequate response to such schemes, the option based system is not comprehensive enough and suggested a more joined-up approach would prove more effective; such a system would provide more places to forage for birds reducing competition, making predation more difficult, and filling an identified gap in mid-winter when food is scarcest to achieve demonstrable benefits.

These suggestions are supported by the Rural Economy and Land use Programme, which has recommended considering the effects of ELS measures over a larger area than the single holding to boost their effectiveness in its Policy and Practice Notes.

Organisations defend Environmental Stewardship schemes

Nevertheless, those invested in Environmental Stewardship schemes maintain they can have a positive effect. On Monday (3rd September), the RSPB announced wild seed crops had been planted to provide year-round food at its Northward Hill site in North Kent, including over the identified mid-winter ‘hungry gap’. The site is farmed and surrounded by orchards. 

In January, RSPB director Martin Harper announced that, following entry into an ELS at the RSPB’s Hope Farm in Cambridgeshire, under which 8.5 per cent of the farm’s land has been taken out of production, either under agri-environment options or research trials, farmland bird indicators on the Hope Farm site increased over 200 per cent, whilst crop yields remained consistent with other farms in the area.

image expired

ES measures are in place over thousands of acres of UK farmland. Data from Natural England shows that one HLS option, HE10 ‘Floristically enhanced grass buffer strips (non-rotational),’ which is the main option for wildflower margins to feed farmland birds, is in place over 4,345 ha across 1,436 agreements in England alone. Although ELS buffer strips do not currently guarantee any wildflower content, changes will be made to the ELS scheme from January next year which could see these introduced.

David Hirst, spokesperson for Natural England told Farming Online, “Evidence is now starting to demonstrate that these schemes can have a real and positive impact, but it still remains vitally important to address the problem of the ‘hungry gap’ when the availability of seed from ES options and more ‘natural’ sources is at its lowest. An additional Entry Level option that would support farmers with the cost of spreading seed during this period has therefore been recommended and is expected to come into effect after 1st January 2013.”

He said, “We now have approaching 100,000 ha of key arable option delivery within ES” and assured that new HLS options, which will also come into effect in January 2013, will include other provisions for birds.

Northamptonshire farmer questions current system

However, Andrew Pitts who farms 600 Ha in Northamptonshire said that, whilst ES agreements “serve as a good starting point,” financial incentives would need “revisiting or renegotiating” if their uptake is to become more widespread and effective. He said, “As conditions governing these schemes are changed and joining becomes more challenging, financial incentives will need to increase to attract more farmers. Farmers are businessmen and these grants are not profitable; whilst support payments might just about cover income foregone, in a time of high grain prices, this might not be enough as it will not cover profit forgone.”

Mr Pitts, whose land is currently under ELS conservation measures, has previously assisted in the development of government and NGO policy, including work to formulate Environmental Stewardship measures on more effective management and supplementary bird feeding schemes as part of a group of conservation-minded farmers.

He added that, although it may be an uncomfortable suggestion to make, as some farms or certain parts of holdings are vastly more productive than others, it may prove more beneficial overall to farm certain areas intensively and focus on supporting biodiversity in other, less productive areas. Mr Pitts asked, “Should [higher quality land] be used for  growing potatoes, oilseed rape and so on, should these be ‘stewardship free zones,’ whilst areas that are less productive like parts of this and many other farmers’ land, which are not productive for agriculture but massively so for wildlife, are managed intensively for wildlife?  That may be the best way to deliver good value food.”

Although this approach has been championed by industry and even scientific advisors to Defra in the past, and could provide short to medium-term benefits for food production in some areas and wildlife in others, the value of conserving ‘natural capital,’ is increasingly being promoted by policy makers.

The idea that, by creating healthier, more biodiverse and reduced-impact agri-environments through a more holistic approach to agriculture and environmental protection the worst ravages of climate change could be mitigated is gaining more general acceptance. More resilient, locally sensitive systems may be better able to withstand the effects of climate change and peak oil whilst still providing food, as the fragility of fossil fuel-dependent, water intensive farming is exposed.    

Speaking in July, Dr Julia Wright of the UK’s Centre for Agroecology and food Security offered a scathing summary of the current dominant discourse, “In Europe in general there is a lot of talk of 'sustainable intensification' - producing more food on the existing land area - and this would be a good approach if only it really were sustainable. Unfortunately, however, the term is being used to further industrialise agriculture and this should really just be called what it is - pure intensification with no sustainability. For real sustainable intensification we need only to employ permaculture style approaches - it’s not technically difficult but the challenge remains in people's worldviews and belief systems."

However, with the acknowledgement of many key organisations, including the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, that enough food is being produced to adequately feed the global population and that inequality, waste and environmental degradation need to be tackled before shifting focus to increasing production, in order to feed the world’s hungry, comes a subtle paradigm shift which allows for greater consideration of nature.

Increasingly, such influential organisations are pushing for environmental and social considerations to be given equal importance to economic ones, and this may prove to be where Environmental Stewardship measures, through greater financial support or mandatory implementation, come into their own.

 

Dr Gavin Siriwardena, Head of Land-Use Research at the BTO and an author on the paper which appeared in the Journal of Applied Ecology, opined, “The right management in the right places has real effects on populations. [Agri-environment schemes] work as a mechanism for enhancing national bird populations – they are worth it if we care about the environment we live in. We cannot get away from the fact that birds are still declining – we need to keep improving the management options available to farmers and encouraging higher uptake.”

He concluded that, in the immediate term, “The changes Defra are making to ELS should definitely help, but it is quite likely that we will need more revisions to cover the late winter ‘hungry gap’, for example.”

Tweet